These accommodations are sensible because allowances for individual needs do not threaten the overall public good.

Proposition A proponents argue the proposal does not pose such a threat and simply promotes choice.

The ballot language, indeed, seems benign. It would eliminate the provision that trash be collected only by an "authorized" collector - which now is Allied Waste.

In practice, the change would remove cost controls, likely resulting in higher fees. Does anyone really believe a trash hauler can afford the expenses of manpower, vehicles and gasoline to serve one, or even a few, residents in a neighborhood?

The answer is readily available by looking at other cities and areas, including rural Cole County, where trash removal is more expensive.

Proposition A also could prompt a breach-of-contract lawsuit that could result in legal costs to taxpayers.

Most important, however, is the trash contract's contribution to the common good.

What's so good about it? Consider, since the contract became effective in 2009:

• Two million pounds of trash, previously unaccounted for, has been collected. Much of this trash was illegally burned, dumped or disposed of in commercial or residential receptacles or public venues, at the expense of other users and taxpayers.

• Six million pounds of items have been recycled, a seven-fold increase.

• Twenty-four percent of the city's total waste tonnage now is recycled, which will extend the life of the landfill.

Although the trash contract can be improved, it generally has distributed costs reasonably and transformed Jefferson City into a cleaner and more attractive community.